NEW YORK -- An academic study of NBA officiating found that white referees called fouls at a greater rate against black players than against white players, The New York Times reported on its Web site Tuesday night.

ESPN.com - NBA - Report: White refs call more fouls on black players (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2857469)

I must say, this is something I have never noticed in all the NBA games I have watched. However, I've never thought to look before.

I saw that but wasn't sure if I should post it. lol

Study: NBA Referees Racially Biased (http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-24-4/Study--NBA-Referees-Racially-Biased.html)

It's funny that the NBA does their own inquiry that makes them look good.

Reminds me of the weekend Game 4 between Miami and Chicago. Jim Gray interviews Stern on the sideline and goes after him like a pitbull. Asks Stern about the Seattle owner saying they are going to move to Vegas, Stern says "He did not say that."

Gray replies that it was confirmed by the owner's public relations officer, and Stern says, "He will issue a retraction."

At one point, Stern finally tells Jim, "Can't we just focus on this series and bla blabla?" He can't handle the tough questions, but he is a slippery as an eel.

I'm only surprised that it didn't occour at a higher percentage rate. The ills of society affect all job descriptions.

I am listining to Colin Cowherd on ESPN.com: ESPNRadio.com (http://www.espnradio.com) right now....

He is talking about this subject.:nerd2:

I like The Herd

I think that while this study is probably very sound in terms of statistical analysis, it's not clear that it makes so much of a difference that anything major would need to be done about it. As linwood says, it's not the sort of thing most of us would ever notice, and the story quotes a couple of players (Mike James and Alan Henderson) as not having noticed anything along those lines either. On one political blog that I read, someone pointed this out:

An increase in fouls of 2.5-4.5% per 48 minutes for African-American players is incredibly low. If state troopers only stopped black drivers 5% more often than white drivers we would be crowing about the incredible reduction of racial profiling.The authors of the study agree with that, at least somewhat:

Both men cautioned that the racial discrimination they claim to have found should be interpreted in the context of bias found in other parts of American society.

“There’s bias on the basketball court,” Mr. Wolfers said, “but less than when you’re trying to hail a cab at midnight.”

In a related topic, I was discussing the immigration rallies with a friend yesterday.

The topic came up that if you have laws, then you should probably enforce them.

Which then made me think of the speed limit laws on highways. The speed limits are so low, that virtually all drivers break the law when they drive. This sets the table for "selective enforcement" from the police. When you have a system like that, it really opens the doors for discrimination... i.e., a cop can discriminate without showing it, because the black motorist he pulls over was technically speeding.

It's a little like that in the NBA I think. Players grab and hold and there is a high amount of selective enforcement of the NBA rules. Holding in football is similar. So, this means that the refs have to choose when to follow the letter of the law and when to turn a blind eye. This split second decision point is probably affected by biases that are so ingrained and subtle that the refs don't even know they are doing it.

And I think that is what the article was getting at.

It's a little like that in the NBA I think. Players grab and hold and there is a high amount of selective enforcement of the NBA rules. Holding in football is similar. So, this means that the refs have to choose when to follow the letter of the law and when to turn a blind eye. This split second decision point is probably affected by biases that are so ingrained and subtle that the refs don't even know they are doing it.

And I think that is what the article was getting at.

I think what the officials have to keep in mind is that even though you can't call everything....the bottom line is there has to be a level playing field for all players of both teams. Calling the game as evenly as possible includes not letting players like LeBron take 12 steps without dribbling. That stuff just ruins the integrity of the game.

So when is Dirk going to capitalize on his white prize and get past golden state already? :pound:

Why couldn't Joe have used this to his advantage and signed a guy for the playoffs to hack the crap out of the likes of Shaq?

Thats 5% more hurt on the Diesel for the same cost as Dale davis fouling out. :gun1:

This is ridiculous. :yellowprison:

Maybe we can make a move and get Doleac next year.

Too bad we traded Darko before this report came out. This information will surely boost his negotiating power by about 5% with Orlando.

Better question is why isn't Utah cleaning up right now?

I think the whole reason for the study is an underhanded push to get more white players into the League. They try to make it seem that the more white guys you have the easier the refs will be on you. Very sneaky.

The article did say it was a two way street, although the effect was "less pronounced" in black refs calling fouls on white players. So, what was the difference. Was it like whites call 5% more on blacks but blacks "only" call 4 % more on whites?

I'd like the facts.

Also, we probably need a stat genius like our own DBA to figure this out but what is the margin of error considering there are much fewer white players in the league than black players? Does that affect this at all?

You know, I was all for Imus getting fired, but for now, I will say this white/black ref thing is a bunch of bunk. This is absolutely NOT a reflection on Linwood for posting it. He's just sharing info, but I think the people who wrote it were just looking to stir the pot. :stirthepot:

What I find interesting is the amount of "white" players in the nba that are European. I think they get jobbed with an inordinate amount of quick whistles.

I'm only surprised that it didn't occour at a higher percentage rate. The ills of society affect all job descriptions.

If this is indeed true, it doesnt suprise me in the least bit. Even in a league dominated by a minority, the minority still can't cannot obtain equallity, justice and objectivity.

Off the subject, hate to say it but the "league" is probably salivating at the fact that the MVP will be caucasian for a third time in a row. Although I never had a problem with this before it just make you wonder a little about the "league." Anyway, the MVP is a regular season award and Steve and Dirk are the kings of the regular season. In the playoffs I'm looking for guys who are gonna will their teams to victory despite who they play. Nash and Nowitzki in my opinion do not fit that category and never will.

:stirthepot: :angrysoapbox:

Andrei Kirilenko sheds tears after being informed of his secret Nigerian heritage.

...He hasn't been able to buy a whistle ever since.

http://www.trenthead.com/l/10129111.jpg

Look guys, bottom line is without knowledge of what referee made what calls this study is more than worthless.

When the players union contends something like this then it will be time to get upset about it.

I bet this was commissioned by Stern to deflect attention away from his ref rigging. This makes it seem like the refs are 95% fair.

I bet this was commissioned by Stern to deflect attention away from his ref rigging. This makes it seem like the refs are 95% fair.

:pound:

LOL at the Kirilenko picture.


If this is indeed true, it doesnt suprise me in the least bit. Even in a league dominated by a minority, the minority still can't cannot obtain equallity, justice and objectivity

I think that is a bit of an overstatement explosivity...but even if this officiating bias is true which the League study denies...how would you feel about the League making an effort to have the racial makeup of the officiating crews be more proportionate to the racial makeup of the players?

Also, we probably need a stat genius like our own DBA to figure this out but what is the margin of error considering there are much fewer white players in the league than black players? Does that affect this at all?

You see, that would involve me going downstairs and asking one of those modeler folks who work for me which would involve me demonstrating how much I don't really know. This might pose a serious problem for the chain of command.

From what I've read...

The NBA used full knowledge of who called what foul. I.e., ref x who is white called foul y on player z. Now of course it is illegal to ask employees their race so someone had to determine who is black, white, Asian, native American, Eskimo, and what have you. All right, maybe Jess Kersey isn't so hard.

Assuming this is what they did, the league had census information so the rates of foul calling they produced are the actual numbers - no confidence intervals required.

The other guys didn't have this data and would have had to create a model that estimated the foul calling rates based on the racial makeup of the entire crew (all black, all white, 1-2, 2-1). This model could have confidence intervals placed around the estimates, but without knowing what sort of technique they used, or having access to the data there really isn't a way to guess what those might look like.

But, you are right, that the racial makeup of the players and of the refs certainly did not remain constant over the period of the study. I'd guess that the rate of foul calling varied too. Certainly having actual knowledge of who called what foul on whom is a better way to measure the effect. Assuming no one is trying to make their approach look better for some unknown selfish reason (:)), then the NBA with full knowledge ought to be able to make a better determination.

LOL at the Kirilenko picture.




I think that is a bit of an overstatement explosivity...but even if this officiating bias is true which the League study denies...how would you feel about the League making an effort to have the racial makeup of the officiating crews be more proportionate to the racial makeup of the players?

We would also have to make sure that the forum members accurately reflect the racial proportion of the NBA so that we can have an unbiased discussion about it.

Study suggests racial bias in NBA referees' calls (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070502/UPDATE/705020445/1127/SPORTS0102)

Of course, NBA says that their study shows no bias. (like we would have expected anything else from them).

You see, that would involve me going downstairs and asking one of those modeler folks who work for me which would involve me demonstrating how much I don't really know. This might pose a serious problem for the chain of command.

From what I've read...

The NBA used full knowledge of who called what foul. I.e., ref x who is white called foul y on player z. Now of course it is illegal to ask employees their race so someone had to determine who is black, white, Asian, native American, Eskimo, and what have you. All right, maybe Jess Kersey isn't so hard.

Assuming this is what they did, the league had census information so the rates of foul calling they produced are the actual numbers - no confidence intervals required.

The other guys didn't have this data and would have had to create a model that estimated the foul calling rates based on the racial makeup of the entire crew (all black, all white, 1-2, 2-1). This model could have confidence intervals placed around the estimates, but without knowing what sort of technique they used, or having access to the data there really isn't a way to guess what those might look like.

But, you are right, that the racial makeup of the players and of the refs certainly did not remain constant over the period of the study. I'd guess that the rate of foul calling varied too. Certainly having actual knowledge of who called what foul on whom is a better way to measure the effect. Assuming no one is trying to make their approach look better for some unknown selfish reason (:)), then the NBA with full knowledge ought to be able to make a better determination.

Thanks DBA. Sounds complex. :dizzy2:

LOL at the Kirilenko picture.




I think that is a bit of an overstatement explosivity...but even if this officiating bias is true which the League study denies...how would you feel about the League making an effort to have the racial makeup of the officiating crews be more proportionate to the racial makeup of the players?


Bills didnt you notice how I started my statement in saying "IF THIS IS INDEED TRUE." These findings have not been proven to absolute, Bills.

We would also have to make sure that the forum members accurately reflect the racial proportion of the NBA so that we can have an unbiased discussion about it.

Well look at our U.S. government it directly reflects our societal make-up, doesnt it. More Majority and less Minority. I think that about sums it up. The Minority whether it in the "league" or in society MAY always get the short end, just the way life is.

I agree that subconsious discrimination is an interesting and real phenomenon, however, this study is an incredibly poor example. The only thing this study does is suggest that when an officiating crew has a certain number of white referees, this phenomenon occurs, however, there is a wide and deep gulf that cannot be leaped over to just say that from that we can make any statement about any one white or black ref.

Another thought - isn't it true that white and black athletes have different natural athletic movement, ability and playing styles? This study doesn't take into account the fact that usually due to physiological factors, white and black athletes play the game differently, and since in the NBA black players are in the vast majority, the refereeing will be more shaped by the playing style of the majority. Of course, it would be close to impossible to take these kinds of physical differences into account, making it impossible in my mind to even try to draw social conclusions from this type of study.

Well look at our U.S. government it directly reflects our societal make-up, doesnt it. More Majority and less Minority. I think that about sums it up. The Minority whether it in the "league" or in society MAY always get the short end, just the way life is.

Except, this article is saying that minority in the league is getting the benefit. The opposite.

What about the female refs? Can you assume that they guys they don't call fouls are "Queens".

How about school alumni. Will a ref who graduated from a Big 10 school call fewer relative fouls on Big 10 alumni players?

How about city or residence. Do officials who live in N.Y. call fewer fouls on the Knicks or do they call more because they are over compensating?

There are many different ways to try and find subjectivity in officiating. A statistician's dream.

:hoops:

Anything that can shake up the reffing status quo is good news to me.

Why can't someone do a study of name brand players vs no name players and report that? Probably get a 20% bias there.

I think the researchers simply draw the wrong conclusion from their results. White guys (especially Euros) are just 5% softer than the rest of the league.

I wonder if they threw out all data related to Yao, since he is neither black nor white.

I wonder if they threw out all data related to Yao, since he is neither black nor white.

Or how about Kidd and Bibby?

Or how about Kidd and Bibby?


Where does Delfino fit in?

We would also have to make sure that the forum members accurately reflect the racial proportion of the NBA so that we can have an unbiased discussion about it.

When I signed up, I checked "other".

Thanks DBA. Sounds complex. :dizzy2:

Here's the official response from a modeler...

Off the top of my head I would guess that this is some kind of Bayesian Poisson regression. Dependent variable is number of fouls per player per game. Independent variables are race of player, minutes played, some general measure of the player’s foul-proneness, maybe some other measures based on player or team characteristics and race composition of the referees. Poisson because you’re predicting a count for a low-frequency event, Bayesian because you use a prior (a truncated Poisson distribution including only 0 through 6) to constrain the number of fouls a single player can have in a game. You get coefficients for each of the possible referee combinations. By subsetting the players by race and running separate models, you can make inferences about how the effects of race composition of refs vary by race of player.

Well, I just found the paper, and it turns out that I gave them more credit for being sophisticated modelers than they are. It’s a simple player-level regression with the foul rate as the dependent variable. (Other than the form of the model, my guess wasn’t too far off.). Here’s the link:

http://bpp.wharton.upenn.edu/jwolfers/Papers/NBARace.pdf

However questionable the methodology may be, it still strikes me that the NBA doth protest too much.

Another thought - isn't it true that white and black athletes have different natural athletic movement, ability and playing styles? This study doesn't take into account the fact that usually due to physiological factors, white and black athletes play the game differently, and since in the NBA black players are in the vast majority, the refereeing will be more shaped by the playing style of the majority. Of course, it would be close to impossible to take these kinds of physical differences into account, making it impossible in my mind to even try to draw social conclusions from this type of study.

Uh, no.

If this is indeed true, it doesnt suprise me in the least bit. Even in a league dominated by a minority, the minority still can't cannot obtain equallity, justice and objectivity.

Off the subject, hate to say it but the "league" is probably salivating at the fact that the MVP will be caucasian for a third time in a row. Although I never had a problem with this before it just make you wonder a little about the "league." Anyway, the MVP is a regular season award and Steve and Dirk are the kings of the regular season. In the playoffs I'm looking for guys who are gonna will their teams to victory despite who they play. Nash and Nowitzki in my opinion do not fit that category and never will.

:stirthepot: :angrysoapbox:


I would be interested in seeing the comparison done with JUST TECHNICAL fouls.......This may tell a different story. THINK ABOUT IT............

I was salivating when Nash won the MVP award, not with Dirk though.
I think the league believes that they will draw their fan base based on a race being able to identify "their own" in the game. They probably began salivating when foreign players became vogue........Dirk = German, I think Nash = Canadian.................

Or how about Kidd and Bibby?

I'm cryin ovah heah!

:pound:

Uh, no.

DBA, can you explain what you mean by this?

Independent variables are race of player, minutes played, some general measure of the player’s foul-proneness, maybe some other measures based on player or team characteristics and race composition of the referees.

This is kind of more what I was trying to get at. Different players are more prone to have fouls called on them because of the way they play. In theory, Shaq should get more fouls called on him because he manhandles people, others are less aggressive in certain situations.

I think what really influences the refs much more than race is playing style and experience. I think that there are biases in the way games are called, but I think this study is getting skewed results because it is not objectively analyzing the way games are reffed, instead it seems like it is doing subjective analysis, looking for a link that is not there. You can prove anything with statistics. This is why I think my list of referees stats from the regular season is not really all that conclusive, since it doesn't measure things like the behavior of individual referees and how they individually call games.

DBA, can you explain what you mean by this?

This is kind of more what I was trying to get at. Different players are more prone to have fouls called on them because of the way they play. In theory, Shaq should get more fouls called on him because he manhandles people, others are less aggressive in certain situations.

I think what really influences the refs much more than race is playing style and experience. I think that there are biases in the way games are called, but I think this study is getting skewed results because it is not objectively analyzing the way games are reffed, instead it seems like it is doing subjective analysis, looking for a link that is not there. You can prove anything with statistics. This is why I think my list of referees stats from the regular season is not really all that conclusive, since it doesn't measure things like the behavior of individual referees and how they individually call games.


Sure. First, I'll say that I agree with what you've wrote here. There are a lot of other factors relative to who is playing, what positions they're playing, who called what, etc. that this work doesn't take into account. Maybe the results wouldn't have come out this way if those factors were accounted for, maybe the results would have been even more extreme. There really isn't a way to know. Maybe there were some racially motivated refs ten or fifteen years ago that do not reflect the way the game is called today. Given our society, that's not hard to at least imagine.

What I reacted to was what I saw as a possible interpretation of part of what you wrote above. And that was kind of referring to what used to be "common" knowledge about athletic abilities and race. Think of the Howard Cosell (sp?) view of the world. I remember it best from comparisons sportscasters used to make between Jordan and Bird. Bird was blessed with intelligence and was the product of hard work while Jordan was a "natural" athlete who got by on physical abilities alone. Clearly though Jordan worked as hard or harder on his game than any other player ever to step on the floor. And just as clearly, Bird was an immensely gifted player in a physical sense. The truth is that no one succeeds in the NBA without a combination of physical gifts, basketball intelligence, and a lot of hard work. It was just one of the ways many people used to think. It was a way in which black players were made second class citizens because they got where they were from genetics and not from smarts and hard work - the classic American values.

Anyway, I'm not saying that this is what you meant. What you wrote just reminded me of some of those old days. I should have explained that more fully in my first post.

Different players are more prone to have fouls called on them because of the way they play. In theory, Shaq should get more fouls called on him because he manhandles people, others are less aggressive in certain situations.


If a player fouls alot, that is OK, because all refs should call a lot of fouls on that player. What they are saying is that on the margin, that foul prone black player gets more fouls called on him by white refs than black refs. So, each players' tendencies and playing style are cancelled out of the equation.

I think that in the end, everyone realizes that it is not a massive bias. The fact that it goes both ways seems to make it even smaller.

Iverson was right when he said that this study is unfair to the refs. If they were subconsciously doing this, are they supposed to try to compensate now to make up for it?

David Stern was on WDFN with Matt Dery a couple nights ago, and he graded the officials a B+ because "there has to be room for improvement".

Stern was on NPR defending the officials from the racial issues.

NPR : NBA's Stern Rejects Report on Referees' Bias (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10000169)

And this is hilarious.

Ko8e.com: Preferential Treatment of Dwyane Wade, Double-Standards, and Officiating in General (http://ko8e.blogspot.com/2007/04/preferential-treatment-of-dwyane-wade_19.html)

Links courtesy of Henry Abbott @ TrueHoop.com

David Stern was on WDFN with Matt Dery a couple nights ago, and he graded the officials a B+ because "there has to be room for improvement".

Stern was on NPR defending the officials from the racial issues.

NPR : NBA's Stern Rejects Report on Referees' Bias (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10000169)

And this is hilarious.

Ko8e.com: Preferential Treatment of Dwyane Wade, Double-Standards, and Officiating in General (http://ko8e.blogspot.com/2007/04/preferential-treatment-of-dwyane-wade_19.html)

Links courtesy of Henry Abbott @ TrueHoop.com

Oh man, that is hilarious. And frustrating. Those games last for nearly 3 hours while Wade takes FT after FT. Boring. Real, real boring.

Oh man, that is hilarious. And frustrating. Those games last for nearly 3 hours while Wade takes FT after FT. Boring. Real, real boring.

Some of the calls/non-calls were amazing. Its hard to like these guys when they get that kind of advantage. In that Portland game. Only takes one bad call like that and the home fans will start to dislike the guy.

You know, this is partly why the US keeps losing in the Olympics. Our stars go in there and are not used to playing without all the calls.

Some of the calls/non-calls were amazing. Its hard to like these guys when they get that kind of advantage. In that Portland game. Only takes one bad call like that and the home fans will start to dislike the guy.

You know, this is partly why the US keeps losing in the Olympics. Our stars go in there and are not used to playing without all the calls.

I just watched some of the LeBron video. That guy takes 3 or 4 steps when he goes to the basket, even on undefended fast breaks. I guess if you don't have to concentrate on dribbling, you can focus more on spectacular highlight dunks.

I also noticed (not on this video) that King James uses the off arm clearout quite a bit.
:rolleyes: